Return-Path: Received: from email2k3.itlnet.net ([64.19.112.12] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.8) with ESMTP id 617679 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 22 Jan 2005 14:55:59 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.19.112.12; envelope-from=jwvoto@itlnet.net Received: from rav.itlnet.net (unverified [192.168.10.149]) by itlnet.net (Rockliffe SMTPRA 6.1.16) with SMTP id for ; Sat, 22 Jan 2005 13:55:29 -0600 Received: from JWVOTO (unverified [64.19.115.196]) by itlnet.net (Rockliffe SMTPRA 6.1.16) with SMTP id for ; Sat, 22 Jan 2005 13:55:28 -0600 Message-ID: <00fb01c500bc$b4ae4a60$c4731340@JWVOTO> From: "Wendell Voto" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Fuel Pump Load Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 11:36:28 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0085_01C50076.9CBCFFA0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0085_01C50076.9CBCFFA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fuel Pump Load Okay, I'm conviced, I'll go for 100% over rated current draw. Wendelll=20 > Why so close? Why not 50%? Is there a compelling reason to match=20 > breakers that close to the "anticipated" load that I'm missing?? > A little puzzled around this ... Jim S. >=20 > Wendell Voto wrote: >=20 > > =20 > > > > *Subject:* [FlyRotary] Re: Fuel Pump Load > > > > What he said! Very common question that I get and this is the > > correct answer. DO NOT try to directly match the load with the > > breaker (or fuse if you insist) rating. > > =20 > > Tracy > > > > I am trying to size the breakers at 25% over normal current > > draw of the device. Okay? > > Wendell > > >=20 > >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > >> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html ------=_NextPart_000_0085_01C50076.9CBCFFA0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fuel Pump Load
Okay,  I'm conviced, I'll go for 100% = over rated=20 current draw.
Wendelll 
> Why so = close? =20 Why not 50%?  Is there a compelling reason to match
> = breakers that=20 close to the "anticipated" load that I'm missing??
> A little = puzzled=20 around this ... Jim S.
>
> Wendell Voto wrote:
> =
>=20 > 
> >
> >     *Subject:* = [FlyRotary] Re: Fuel Pump Load
> >
> = >    =20 What he said!  Very common question that I get and this is = the
>=20 >     correct answer.  DO NOT try to = directly match=20 the load with the
> >     breaker (or fuse = if you=20 insist) rating.
> >     
>=20 >     Tracy
> >
>=20 >         I am trying to size = the=20 breakers at 25% over normal current
>=20 >         draw of the = device. =20 Okay?
> >        =20 Wendell
> >
>
> >>  Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> = >>  Archive:   http://lancai= ronline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html ------=_NextPart_000_0085_01C50076.9CBCFFA0--